crc4

There are places where a cash purchase saves big bucks. Countless times when getting a estimate or price for a service or item, I'll ask 'what if I pay cash?' It's rare that I don't get anywhere from 7-15% discount for using greenbacks. Last big job I was told $3700. I got it for $3100 with cash. I always ask for and get a signed paper receipt.

All excellent books. There is something almost magical about books that's not present on digital devices. Someone will be fortunate to add them to their stacks.

Two things worked in Colie's favor. 1. He was in Virginia. In many other states and cities, he would have been found guilty. 2. His attackers were white. Had they been black, he would have been facing an uphill battle. Imagine the typical race arsonists like Crump and Sharpton playing the always present race cards. Riots and looting would have occurred the moment he was found not guilty and most likely before the trial. On Colie's last charge that he's facing, I believe it will be dismissed as it should have been when he was found not guilty of the two other felony charges.

Now the questions for Colie is, "Was it worth it?" You've been in jail since April 2, you've racked up tens of thousands in legal bills, you'll be civilly sued (and lose), and it will be hard to get another job. Plus, you're still facing a couple to ten years in prison. Was it worth it?

Andrew Branca just covered this. Delivery Guy Shoots Unarmed Prankster If you want to know all the legal aspects of a lawful self-defense action, Andrew Branca is the expert.

Juries are the finders of facts. ACLDN determines whether you followed the 5 Laws of Self Defense. If you did, you're covered. If you didn't you're not. I don't see a problem. ACLDN doesn't say you're guilty. They say you don't qualify under the terms of agreement. That's a big difference. A homeowner's insurance company may find you committed insurance fraud and not pay your claim. If you're prosecuted criminally, the jury will determine if you're lawfully guilty of fraud. An insurance company does not wait until you're convicted of fraud or found not guilty to deny your claim. $150 a year for coverage from ACLDN is not a ton of money. Act within the laws of self-defense and you won't have a problem qualifying for the specified coverage. Act outside the laws of self defense and your claim is justifiably denied. It's really that simple. Perhaps the question you should be asking is do you know the laws of self defense. If you don't and act unlawfully, you won't be covered. Again, that's how it should be.

There's nothing like the security of people watching you place your handgun in a headrest or quickly and secretly drawing your firearm from opening a headrest. No one would notice as thieves and robbers are notoriously blind. This sounds like something the government would invent as a gun safety FUBAR.

You are correct. That's they way it should be. Just because you say it was a lawful SD action doesn't make it so. Criminals claim SD all the time when it's not. ACLDN has your attorney send their findings to them to be sure it was a lawful SD action so they don't waste additional money. ACLDN has that responsibility to its members to be sure that they aren't funding an unlawful SD action. I like that. It makes it incumbent on the member to act lawfully by KNOWING the laws of SD, not just guessing. If your house has damage, your homeowners insurance sends a rep out to check the damage. They don't take your word on it. That keeps your homeowners company from spending money for non-legitimate claims. It's no different with ACLDN.

One thing to add, is your choice of attorney. Not all attorneys, including 90% or more of criminal lawyers, rarely get a 'good guy' client such as a legally justified SD actor. Criminal attorneys get guilty people and work to get them off. A good SD lawyer needs to know how to keep a 'good guy' out of the judicial system, and if prosecuted how to defend them. A lawyer defending a guilty person and a lawyer defending a 'good guy" in an SD shooting are rarely the same. Find a lawyer now, before you need him/her. I did and he's represented many justified SD shooters with success. You don't want a lawyer who is charging you hourly fees to learn on your dime how to handle a legitimate SD case.

Good comparison, though the information is dated (2017) and some of it has changed since then, but it's a good place to start.

Most insurance carriers can deny you if your claim does not fall into a legally justified Self Defense action. Basically, if you do not have the 5 Elements of a justifed and legal Self Defense action, you will be denied. If you don't know the laws that govern SD, then you're already playing in a minefield. Where insurance comes into play is if you do have the 5 Elements in your favor but are still charged and prosecuted. All companies will want to see the facts of the case and make a determination of your innocence before spending funds. That's as it should be. Some companies will also ask for any money spent in your defense, if you are found guilty or make a plea deal, to be repaid. The Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network does not do that. The funds spent for your defense, whether you're found guilty or make a plea deal, are not required to be returned. The ACLDN is not an insurance carrier. It is not insurance. It's a self supporting fund currently standing a 4 million. Up to one-half of that fund can be spent on your case both in a criminal case and a civil case. Do your own research. Read the fine print. Don't believe the hype, particularly with USCCA. Remember, USCCA is not an insurance carrier - they buy a policy to cover their members, and insurance companies want to hold on to that money. Even with a legally justified case, USCCA has been known to deny coverage. Again, do your research.

WTB - Wilderness Safepacker Government Model Black color, no tears or damage Need photos Payment by PayPal or cash with a FTF in Cleveland, TN

Gavin Newsom is looking for a replacement. Here's my advice. Gavin. Go to a mental asylum and find a brain-dead vegetable that looks like Fetterman the Pinhead and cackles like Kamaltoe Harris. They'll be a perfect replacement for Feinstein.

Feinstein's been brain-dead for decades. Good riddance.

The problem may be fixed; I'm not saying it is or isn't. I'm saying that gun companies, or any company, that first denies a problem, then says the problem is fixed leaves me with a lack of confidence in that product and that company. I also won't buy GM, Ford, or Chrysler vehicles as I have no confidence in those products and companies. I won't buy SIg Sauer products as they don't appeal to me for my purposes. In particular I wouldn't buy a P320. It's just as simple as that. The OP asked for opinions and comments. I've given mine and I'm done.

It is news to me as I don't shoot Sig Sauer firearms, but have read and seen of the problems with the Sig Sauer P320. Just because Sig Sauer says they fixed it doesn't inspire any more confidence that when Takada said they fixed the exploding air bags in vehicles.

So you're saying that there was something wrong with the pre-recall Sig P320s? That they could and did fire without human interference? That's interesting.

Oops. Sig P320 goes Boom. I guess this P320 hadn't gone through the voluntary program.

There are two camps on the Sig P320. The first is that all the unintended discharges are human error. The second camp is that the pistol can fire without human interaction. Do be aware that if someone has a Sig P320 that does go off without human interaction and property damage is the result or a person is harmed, you will be sued if you 'knew' of the potential of the possibility of a discharge without human interaction. If someone is injured or dies, a prosecutor could seek an indictment for reckless endangerment or if death results, reckless homicide. Is that a chance you're willing to take? As the situation has not been resolved for certain in either case, I personally wouldn't own one. There are plenty of pistols available without the cloud hanging over the P320 at this time. As an aside, do you want to buy a gun without complete confidence in that firearm? Sig makes good guns. This one may be the exception so why take a chance?

Fact-checked by the same people who said Joe Biden was qualified to be president, had all his marbles, and didn't like to smell young girls' hair.

This is what happens when you have people who do nothing, contribute nothing to civilization, received welfare for generations, too lazy to work but not to lazy to get food stamps, live in government and subsidized housing that is free and looks like a bombed-out town in Ukraine, have no morals, lack responsibility and ethics, yet vote for honest taxpayers to give them more and more and take everything but still live like willfully ignorant jungle pigs (no offense to real pigs). This is democracy unrestrained by justice. No wonder Socrates didn't like democracy as this is the result.

Just hope it doesn't go behind the cabinets, in the walls, or under the floors and dies. You'll know it if it happens.

The Mepro 21 is the best optic I've ever owned. I have one on my S&W FPC and it's deadly. Good price for this new one w/the extras.

Poisons poison more than just mice and rats. I won't use them.

When this headrest 'safe' came out, it was good for 15 minutes of belly laughs.